Mary Biketi, popularly known for her alleged relationship with former Kakamega Governor Wycliffe Oparanya, has stirred controversy after making remarks perceived as demeaning to ordinary Kenyans.
In a video that has since gone viral, Biketi is heard telling Kenyans to first repay the Hustler Fund before addressing her, adding that she is not “poor like them.” Her statement — “Lipeni Hustler Fund ndio mniongeleshe, mimi sio maskini kama nyinyi!” — has ignited sharp criticism online, with many accusing her of arrogance and insensitivity.
For many Kenyans struggling with the high cost of living, the Hustler Fund was introduced as a lifeline to access small loans. However, Biketi’s remarks were interpreted as mocking those who depend on the initiative. Critics argue that such statements highlight a growing disconnect between individuals close to political figures and the everyday struggles of ordinary citizens.
The backlash has also reopened debates about public morality and accountability among people linked to leaders. Social media users noted that while Biketi may not hold public office, her association with a senior politician places her under public scrutiny. “When you enjoy the privileges of proximity to power, you must also carry yourself with humility and responsibility,” one commentator wrote.
On the other hand, a small section of her defenders argued that her comments may have been taken out of context or said in the heat of the moment. Still, the majority opinion reflects frustration with the widening gap between Kenya’s political elite — and those around them — and the ordinary mwananchi.
This incident underscores the powerful role of social media in shaping political discourse. What may have been intended as a casual or defensive remark quickly spiraled into a national conversation about respect, classism, and the social responsibility of those connected to leadership.
As Kenyans continue to debate Biketi’s words, the episode serves as a reminder that in today’s digital age, statements made in jest or arrogance can easily inflame public anger and damage reputations — especially when they touch on issues as sensitive as poverty and survival.
